Meet or hear Laurie in one of the following:

Washington DC Feb 15-19.

Related News Articles


GrandPad announces Grandie, an AI-powered virtual companion.


The rise of passive, non-intrusive PERS devices at CES.


The tech market for seniors boasts many tools, but not all of them are user friendly. 


Says a report from the Senate Aging Committee.


From 101,000 to 422,000 -- mostly women.

Monthly blog archive

You are here

With a reluctance to spend money, will we be Healthy at Home?

Read it and weep -- the conundrum of home health tech. The large (130 pages) Healthy@Home 2.0 report written by Linda Barrett released on Friday by AARP shows several dimensions of market self-delusion, not the least of which is the perspective of the 940 seniors age 65+. Although they have no doubt seen the world around them go from the happy-go-lucky period of the 2007 survey to a not-so-great world in 2010, what they want is for things to 'stay the same', relying on "a lot of luck", a "good attitude" and "hope". Amazingly, most say they do not need to make any changes to their home within the next 5 years. They're mostly in good shape -- but 27% of them have limits on physical activities, 32% have low vision or hearing impairment, and nearly 1 out of 5 reported their health as fair or poor. Meanwhile fewer than 20% are using any home safety technologies, including an alarm system (!); and fewer than 10% use any personal health and wellness technologies mentioned in the survey. These include medication dispensing (described to responders as an electronic pill box), medication management (communicates information to a provider), or a home-based transmitting self-care device for blood pressure readings or diabetes results.

Will they spend money to preserve independence? Not so much. Mostly married ("if they had their spouse, everything would be okay"), white homeowners by the stats, mostly planning to stay in their homes, while 92% said they would be willing to pay for services to help them stay in their homes, 95% are unwilling to pay more than $50/month for home safety technologies -- like an alarm on the door, or 'personal health and wellness devices' like a PERS device. So PERS market pricing today at under $50/month is confirmed here, although only 9% admitted to having a PERS device -- which makes sense given the distribution of responder ages. Compared to 2007, those surveyed are now more aware of medication dispensing and medication management, and now that they are aware, who knew, willingness to use has declined. I suppose that  makes sense for a market that was more mythical in 2007 -- now that seniors are more aware, they (see above) don't think these devices are for them personally -- of course not, they're not 'old'. So get this -- if only their doctor or nurse were willing, 25% now are open to the idea of having have a video consultation which they now imagine is feasible. Feasible yes, likely no.

Computers? No problem - 76% have one in their home -- up from 68%.  Amazingly, 44% have broadband, up from 35% in 2007. And yes, communication with family and friends is its most important purpose (see AARP-sponsored Connected Living for Social Aging report, also released on April 29). It seems as though 1 in 5 are skyping and/or playing games with others -- no doubt assisted by broadband and today's improved screen form factors. It's quite interesting that there is a percentage drop in willingness to use the Internet to search for health information (from 84% to 73%) -- which could be a result of TOO much health-spam, er, information out there (> 62,000 health websites), with not enough of it vetted as reliable.  Let's remember that the latest survey was completed before the groundswell in tablet and smartphone usage. If the survey were fielded today, there's no doubt that this population of healthy seniors would be delving into video, online chatting and reading books online.

What's it mean? The channel matters more than ever.  So if folks who are mostly okay today are willing to pay for services to remain independent, the technology that fills in coverage gaps in that service will be provided, so to speak, by the service providers themselves. From this research, consumers seem to be unlikely to purchase either home safety or wellness tech on their own behalf -- so get to know a geriatric care manager, social services worker, senior housing executive -- that's how folks who need tech, according to Healthy@Home 2.0, will best be reached.  Because they're not in need, they're okay. And home alarm companies, get out there and sell alarm systems to all ages.  Because without an alarm system in the home that can detect fire, swings in temperature, moisture from leaving a faucet running or other dangers, there's absolutely no point to any of the other technology.



The willingness of most Amercians (50 years plus) to anticpaite future personal frailty needs in your own home is psychologically held back by the same human tendency to avoid any kind of catastrophic planning.

This includes dealing with formal advance directives, wills, or assistive/telemedical equipment for you own space.

Sadly most Americans are far more concerned by the esthetics of their home than practical age in place functions.

Most adaptive equipment is chosen by others (i.e. care specalists), under cirsis conditons, and as a reult of a significant personal loss of body function due to obesity, illness or an accident.

We simply don't want to go there.

We only consider change when confronted with the consequences of an unapealing long term care stay in a nursing home. Belatedly we start pleading for some kind of cobbeled together home care plan.

Too late, too expenisve, too bad.

Can you elaborate on your last remark about alarms?

Rather than reply in a comment.  Thanks, Joe, for urging me to do so.

Thanks for that elaboration in the post. I'm off to do some research...

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. If reasoned arguments do not work (and experience has shown that they don't), then "rattling their cages" may be the only practical approach. May seem harsh, but many aging folks may need to dragged kicking and screaming into reality. Their desire for aging in place is simply not attainable with the current groupthink attitude. No one likes to address their inevitable mortality and growing physical and mental "decrepitude", but it is real and must be addressed.

Actually, FUD may be much more effective with the caregiver children than with the senior, since they are the one's that suffer the emotional and financial burdens. A total lifecycle analysis of the actual costs for caregiving, which can be greatly reduced by the leveraging effects of technology available today at reasonable cost, should be widely disseminated in the consumer-focused media. Those of us in the industry are reasonably aware of these true costs. It's the public that is ignorant -- a vast communication problem.

What are needed are agetech FUD evangelists. ;-)

The AARP report is a reasonable snapshot of current situation, 2010. The "payors" which is
government (Medicare, Medicaid), the insurance industry and private individuals will drive the
next cycle of acceptance. Their has been a substantial push to get people out of the hospital sooner and incentivize the providers to enable this. It is happening now with better programs of after care through the use of remote patient monitoring to keep a closer watch on the patient in their home.
The government has an announced program to stop paying (on a gradual scale) for those patients who readmitted within 30 days of an operation (27% is the current number). Those with the checkbook are declaring a deficiency of service to be the reason.
Who wouldn't want a auto repair shop that is guaranteed payment in full for services rendered for the same problem no matter how many times you have to come back!
Healthcare spending has a big elephant in the room no one likes to talk about, how much is spent in the last thirty days of life?? Hold on to your seats.......I've heard as much as 50% !! Hip replacements at age 95, heart/liver transplants at 85, repeated surgeries and hospitalizations until the insurance money runs out and then the poor person is told that's all we can's your pain script and head home.

There is a bright future for preventative care augmented by today's and future sensor/communication technologies. The market forces have no choice but to divert after the fact "crash" care to front end chronic disease and proactive health management.